About your Search

20121006
20121014
STATION
CSPAN 25
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
in 1986 but are staring us in the face today. first, a much larger and much more dangerous deficit and second, a dramatic increase been income and inequality. old-style tax reform could make both conditions worse. but don't dismiss the old framework lightly. credit for the 1986 reform law belongs to democrats like bill bradley in the senate. just as much as to president reagan. as a member of the house back then, i not only voted for it, but i whipped the votes to make sure it passed. i was on the committee set up by dan rostenkowski to get it done. the approach made a good deal of sense at the time. then, as now, the code was littered with egregious loopholes that needed to be reformed. recall the so-called passive law schools that were in place back then. they allowed wealthy taxpayers to gain the system. someone could invest in a bowling alley and then, if the bowling alley lost money, they could take a write off many times larger than their initial money incestment of their entire income tax liability. we need to get rid of such a gimmicky tax shelter. paring these loopholes al
, the problem of running deficits and accumulating greater debt, that the country had a budget deficit, a trade deficit, a balance of payments deficit, and the fourth one you brought up was a leadership deficit. >> leadership is the greatest. >> can i ask you both, describe what is the problem with what appears to be in your mind a leadership deficit, that we're not getting the leadership on this key issue either from this president or past presidents, this congress or pass congresses/ what does it take to get elected officials to tackle at an issue, increasing their taxes? >> let's start with the families. they will get their attention. the voters have to understand all this, which they did not, and voters need to understand what we have to do to get all this corrected, and they do not. if we ever get that over to the voters, they will vote for the people who are geared up, ready, and know how to do it and are running on that basis, and then we can change this country forever and get us back to where we used to be when i was a boy in the depression. why schoolteachers and would have been docto
by the end of the decade. get this deficit and debt under control. make trade work for america. champion small businesses, do not raise taxes on small businesses. they are our job creators. he talks about detroit. mitt romney is a car guy. this is a guide who i was talking to a family in massachusetts the other day. their kids of work hid in a car crash. two of them were paralyzed. they went to the same church. mitt asked if he could come over on christmas. he brought his boys and his wife and deaths. i know you are struggling, do not worry about college, i will pay for it. mitt romney does not tell these stories. it was not the cash, he gave his time and he has consistently. this is a man who gave 30% of its income to charity, more of the two of us combined. he is a good man. he cares about 100% of americans in the country. the vice president knows that sometimes the words did not come out of your mouth the right way. [laughter] >> i always say what i mean. >> we want everybody to succeed. we want to get everybody out of poverty. we believe an opportunity. that is what we're going to pu
means blowing up the deficit or raising taxes on middle-class families. one or the other. pick your poison. last week, mitt romney said, there is no addition to the deficit with my tax plan. if he says it is not true, then it is not true. ok. it is true that it is not going to add to the deficit, that leaves only one option. that is asking middle-class families to foot the bill by getting rid of the deductions for owning a home, raising kids, or sending them to college. as it turned out, most folks do not like that idea either. just last week, on stage, governor romney decided that instead of changing his plan, he would pretended did not exist. what $5 trillion tax cut? i do not know anything about that tax cut. pay no attention to the tax cut under the carpet, behind the curtain. when he was asked how he would cut the deficit, he said he could make the math work by eliminating local public funding for pbs. by the way, this is not new. this is what he has been saying every time he is asked a question. we can cut out pbs. for all you moms and kids out there, do not worry. somebody is
dust of trickle-down economics will somehow erase any damage to the deficit or hold harmless the middle class -- it is a mirage. it is not realistic. the broader issues of tax reform are something that very much interest the president of united states, but has always -- his approach is always that everyone has to pay their fair share, everyone has to pay their -- everyone has to get a fair shot. in the debate he is having with the election and has been having with republicans on capitol hill, if we take a balanced approach that includes increased revenues by asking millionaires and billionaires to pay a little bit more, we can reduce our deficit significantly -- $4 trillion -- while making sure that the middle class does not have its taxes go up and making sure that we invest in education and infrastructure and innovation. the alternative choice that has been presented is that we should lower taxes for millionaires and billionaires and in order to pay for that, we have to turn medicare into a voucher program. we have to get investments in education and innovation, research and developme
national deficit has grown through $16 trillion. the president said he was gone to cut that in half, but it doubled under his watch. very disturbing is that when the president came into office there were 32 million americans on food stamps. today its 47 million. there is still an incredible number of ohioans and americans out there struggling. the choice is clear. we can have four more years like the last of zero four. what america needs is a real recovery. only romney and ryan can provide that. host: when the president took office we were losing 800,000 jobs a month. since the president took office, we have 5.5 million additional jobs. truck about the automobile recovering, he saved the automobile industry and 1/88 jobs in the state are reflective of the auto industry. i worked the railroad 41 years. the guys and women working there, they're happy, jumping up and down because they have employment. one out of eight jobs are connected to the auto industry. not only that, the government at the time, strickland, and the president came to and youngstown, my area, and it one of the last
, in 2010 a bipartisan federal commission unveiled the plan to cut the nation's deficit by $4 trillion through a mix of tax increases and spending cuts. the plan was never voted on in congress. do you agree with any or all with what the commission came up with? what other efforts do you think the country needs to take on to cut the country's debt, which now exceeds $16 trillion? >> debt and our deficit are very important issues that we need to tackle and they're a matter of national security. and this is one of the starkest contrasts between congresswoman bono mack and myself. you see, congresswoman bono mack wants to put the deficit and the burden of our debt on the shoulders of our seniors, our middle class and our students. by turning medicare into a private voucher system and charging our seniors $6,000 a year for their health care costs on average, by cutting pell grants and stafford loans who rely on those for their college education and she's voted to increase taxes on the middle class through the ryan plan. all of this in order to keep tax breaks for multi-millionaires and tax
years later left with massive deficits. during his time in the senate, the national debt went up by $16,000. he conceded that spending was a problem in the senate. we also have people who need to know how to work together. i learned to cut crime bills and the economy. my opponent said his job was to not democrats softly. he took this similar position in the senate, fighting efforts led by the then-senior virginia senator. when someone who will fight and that is what i will do is your next to none state senator. >> if mr. allen, your opening statement. >> thank you. it's much better future than what we are having to endure these days. that is why i put forward a detailed plan. my blueprint for america to get an economy and stronger jobs. the question is which one of us can be accounted upon. you may have read an article that was comparing our two governorships. the call me when the most accomplished modern governors with major improvements in public education, safety, welfare reform, and i described how worked with leaders in the other party to get results for the people. the bad economy
spending cuts and we need to be talking about increasing revenues. it takes both to close the deficit. we both submitted our economic proposals to the boston globe. they were sent out four independent economic analysis. what the independent economists found is that i was 67% more effective at cutting the deficit then senator brown. why? because i am willing to make cuts. i am willing to make substantial cuts. i support substantial cuts. i also believe we have to raise revenues. that is what it will take to get serious about our deficit. i truly believe on this one, this is about our children and grandchildren. we cannot leave it to our grandchildren to pay off our debts. >> great question. we are in the $16 trillion national debt. we are in another trillion dollar deficit. you cannot keep borrowing to pay our bills. when we are talking about cutting military spending, we have party cut in half a trillion dollars. that affects many people in this room and people watching. i have been battling as a member of the arms services committee to try to find the resources to protect our men and wom
administration does not really care about the deficit and how high it is getting. why would you raise the deficit when you owe so much money? it will bankrupt our country. host: what do you do a in redmond, ore.? caller: i am a full-time student at a community college and i also work at a fast-food restaurant to pay bills. host: where are you studying? caller: criminal-justice. host: where are you watching c- span at 6:00 a.m. in the morning in oregon? caller: i get up early allot. earlier, i was watching a different program, in b.c. i think, and i think there were a lot of very baidoa -- nbc, i think, and i think there were a lot of very biased reporters. i switched channels. host: is this your first time watching c-span? caller: no, it is now. i actually watched it a lot. host: that is there a studying criminal justice in redmond, ore.. next up is michael in springdale, another first-time voter. caller: i was flipping through the channels here and listening to a lot of individuals call in and one of the topics that came up is the military. and being a first-time voter, i want to say that as a v
both to close the deficit. we both submitted our economic proposals to the boston globe. they were sent out four independent economic analysis. found is that i was 67% more effective at cutting the deficit then senator brown. why? because i am willing to make cuts. i am willing to make substantial cuts. i support substantial cuts. i also believe we have to raise revenues. that is what it will take to get serious about our deficit. i truly believe on this one, this is about our children and grandchildren. we cannot leave it to our debts. >> that is time. mr. brown? >> great question. we are in the $16 trillion national debt. we are in another trillion dollar deficit. you cannot keep borrowing to pay our bills. when we are talking about cutting military spending, we have party cut in half a trillion dollars. that affects many people in this room and people watching. i have been battling as a member of the arms services committee to try to find the resources to protect our men and women who are serving. we have sequestration coming up. we are trying to work in a bipartisan effort to step b
're facing absolutely massive deficits. this administration has chosen to ignore it. the president has failed, put forth a plan to deal with those deficits and if everyone believes everything is coming up roses, perhaps the vice- president should join me as i travel around the country and speak to people. people in pennsylvania are not terribly thrilled with what happening in the economy. people in youngstown, ohio have stores that are boarded up because the economy is not doing well. it's not only the old industries that are not -- in san jose, calif., they are complaining because they cannot export their high-quality goods to japan and other countries. people in the northwest and in the state of oregon are complaining about what's happening to the timber industry and agriculture industry. things are not as great as the administration is wanting us to believe in their television commercials. my feeling quite frankly is i have enough experience to see the problems, address them, and make the tough decision that level of people with reference to this problem. >> despite the historic aspects of
earns under $200,000 a year. how can he guarantee that and cut the deficit in half as he's promised? >> because we will do what they've not done. if you look at what's happened over the last four years, we have gone from a $5 trillion projected surplus when george bush took office to a $3 trillion projected deficit. they promised they were going to put $2 trillion of the surplus aside for social security. not done. not only that, it's the biggest fiscal turnaround in american history. and there's no end in sight. "the washington post" just reported they have several trillion dollars of additional tax cuts in spending. no suggestion of what they're going to do about it. john kerry and i believe we have a moral responsibility not to leave trillions of dollars of debt to our children and our grandchildren. so, here's what we're going to do, to answer your question, to pay for the things that we believe need to be done. we talk about healthcare and education because we have plans on both those things. what we're going to do is roll back tax cuts -- and i want everyone to hear this becau
of $3 trillion in deficit reductions, which is some combination of tax revenue and spending cuts. therein lies the problem. we have a situation where democrats have been loath to to target the deep spending cuts to domestic programs an impediment programs that would be needed to cut a deal, -- entitlement programs that would be needed to cut a deal, and republicans are loath to consider the idea of any sort of new tax revenue that could be added to the picture. so, how do you put this deal together in no way that makes a policy sense, but also would satisfy the political differences on either side? it really is difficult. if you look to the projections, people say if we do not do anything, this would be great for the nation put the deficit, because tax revenues would automatically go up, spending would go down, and our national deficit would nearly be cut in half. that is a great outcome. yes, it is, but the other hand, the economy, which is in a fragile state, would decline, and we've seen projections of a 0.5% reduction in gdp growth which experts say would put the economy in a
campaign stop in new hampshire was talking about the threat of deficit spending. it's probably something you might hear tonight at the vice- presidential debate. here's a preview. [video clip] >> we cannot keep borrowing 36 cents of every dollar our government spends. we cannot keep the federal reserve doing what. we cannot keep looking our children in the eye, knowing that we are going to give them a diminished future because we are spending their money today. it's a very simple idea. mitt romney and i will bring it to washington. we've got to stop spending money we don't have. we must cut spending. we must get this balanced budget. we must get this debt under control. this debt not only hurts our economy today with the threat of higher interest rates and a losing a dollar and much higher tax rates. we know that we are giving the students here at this academy, our children and grandchildren, a lower standard of living. we've never done that in this country before. host: vice-presidential candidate paul ryan in new hampshire at a recent event. here's what you might hear from the vice-pre
and creating jobs. >> your also worried about the deficit. clearly america has large and ever-growing deficits. the proposed a tax cut. that is defecit spending. >> this is a two-step deal. everybody knows we need the big deal. we talk about that and 30 seconds. we're not going to get to the big deal by jumping off the bridge. what we're saying is that it is not the right thing to do to have the largest tax increase in the history of america and to have up $1.20 trillion worth of spending cuts that do not even look at medicare and medicaid across the board without thinking through what is the deal is going to be. anybody from either party should come to a realization that the big deal counts. all we need to do is get a small part of an extension. when you talk about these taxes and spending, it cannot be done by 10 people in the back room. it has to be done in normal order. they are the only people that understand what you're in those bills. >> to and if you really think we're going to jump off a fiscal cliff? >> i think it is at least that the tax cut scheduled to expire to expire. maybe slig
a deficit, because you are spending money. >> i do not think your labels mean a lot. what i have said from the beginning -- the centerpiece of our problems is the national debt. we simply have to look at this. whether we do it this year because of the way our economy is or next year, $2.3 trillion. >> i want you to respond to this. >> i'm glad there is a clear contrast between the two of us. i do not believe we should raise taxes. i do not think the problem is that americans are not taxed enough. mr. sadler has been very candid that he would consider raising taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax is. >> that is not fair. >> if you would consider allowing all of the bush tax cuts to expire, that would raise taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax. are the texans to pay income taxes we would not raise taxes on? you did not have an answer. >> you will not put words in my mouth. i would say, the first place, we have to balance the budget, cut spending, and raise revenue to reduce the national debt. you have never given any plan to reduce the national debt. anything you eve
, the economy, and the deficit, and a reference to former president kennedy. >> first of all, i was there when ronald reagan gave specifics to what he was going to cut in terms of tax expenditures. 97% of small-business americans paid -- make less than $250,000. amid tell you who some of the other small businesses are. hedge funds that make a hundred million dollars a year. that is what they call as small business. gov. romney on 60 minutes about 10 days ago was asked, you pay 14% on $20 million. somebody making $50,000 face more than that. he said that is fair. that is fair. do you think these guys are going to go out there and cut the loopholes? the biggest loophole they take advantage of is the carriage entrance loophole and the capital gains loophole. the reason that the american enterprise study, the tax policy center study all say taxes will go up on the middle-class is it is the only way you can find at $5 trillion and loopholes as to cut the mortgage deduction for middle-class people, take away their ability to get a tax break to send their kids to college. >> is he wrong about that? >
to eliminate spending that doesn't work. we are ready to have a deficit reduction deal that is big, bold, and balanced. we also understand that in addition to spending cuts you go got to have revenue. hope that moderate republicans will be empowered to negotiate that with us for the good of the country. we have eight minutes left here.x >> congressman, you talked a little bit about that.xxx you know, when we come back and in november and to the capital, all of the congress, all the members of congress including some of the tea party members you hope to defeat this remember will still be here, will still be voting members until at least january, how do you navigate that if democrats are successful in november? >> time in thinking the day after. am focus on how to get into a position where we within the house of representative then we can reach out and cross the aisle and talk to moderate republicans and maybe even to some tea party republicans who have now bee been, have now learned the lesson firsthand as painful it may be that extremism is not a virtue. and maybe we'll be able to talk s
-a-trillion-dollar deficit annually. when george bush came into office, our debt, national debt was around $5 trillion. it's now over $10 trillion. we've almost doubled it. and so while it's true that nobody's completely innocent here, we have had over the last eight years the biggest increases in deficit spending and national debt in our history. and senator mccain voted for four out of five of those george bush budgets. so here's what i would do. i'm going to spend some money on the key issues that we've got to work on. you know, you may have seen your health care premiums go up. we've got to reform health care to help you and your budget. we are going to have to deal with energy because we can't keep on borrowing from the chinese and sending money to saudi arabia. we are mortgaging our children's future. we've got to have a different energy plan. we've got to invest in college affordability. so we're going to have to make some investments, but we've also got to make spending cuts. and what i've proposed, you'll hear senator mccain say well, he's proposing a whole bunch of new spending, but actually i'm
on deficit reduction requiring the wealthy to pay more and more cutting in the federal government. >> you have 90 seconds. >> again, shame on you. you thought this campaign is going to be a coronation because you're a democrat and now you are in a serious race with a serious woman and you are desperate. therefore you raise these issues. my plan sites every word that i used from the brightest in the best to but my plan together. you would be better served to be putting a plan together. you need to be honest with the people of connecticut. you need to be honest about your special interest loans. to be honest about your attendance in washington. shame on you for taking this direction with this campaign. it is beneath you. and the people of connecticut deserve better. in my plan, i have referenced a tax cut for the middle class. my plan, if you take a look at it, absolutely keeps taxes the same across the board accept we're going to cut taxes for the middle class. my plan is the only one that has an actual middle-class tax cut. congressman murphy has voted to raise taxes on the middle class o
a budget deficit of $1.30 trillion and a $16 trillion debt. >> the question would be, is it worth not getting these benefits to the veterans if it means no more lard? >> what happens is those bills will be brought right back. they are popular pieces of legislation. people want to support veterans and they should. when this ad ran that claimed that i would deny care for veterans with missing limbs and legs, it did. it showed pictures of them. my father is a korean war veteran. my brother has done two tours in afghanistan, two in iraq. april white, when she saw that ad, she called our office and said that may be sick because when i cannot get the benefits i was due only one person without the and that was jeff flake. >> let's look at the facts. we can stipulate -- my father and uncle served in combat. my brother served 30 years and special forces. that is not the issue. the congressman is trying to evade the issue. there are three specific bills he voted against those issues. it is not only me. the iraqi-afghanistan veterans organization gave him an f. the vietnam veterans gave him
it done. the failure of the joint deficit committee has left us with the looming arbitrary cuts. those will be mentioned from up here and down there. i'm pleased that the house essentially passed a bill that said no, these impending cuts aren't going to affect military families and certainly i think that's all of our position. we'd like the administration to clarify that that is set in concrete. so again, certainly, as you said commander, we must make it clear that under no circumstances we will not balance the budget on the backs of our men and women in uniform and our veterans. [applause]. i thought you all were napping. and again the good news is i think we're all on board. thanks for your neverts suicide prevention. that's something we work on hard here. there's just a number of things in regard to that. the other thing that i'm concerned about is military voting. that is something that if anybody has a right to vote, it's the men and women that are serving overseas. so i think in a very bipartisan way we're working to ensure that is not going to be a problem. so we're going to pre
for 10% of the deficit spending increases. lower tax rates across the board and close loopholes. we have three bottom lines. do not raise the deficit, do not raise taxes on the middle class, do not lower the share that is borne by the high income earners. it has been discredited by six other studies and even their own deputy campaign manager acknowledged that it was not correct. >> let's talk about this. you have refused to offer specifics on how you would pay for that 20% across the board. do you actually have the specifics or are you still working on it? >> different than this administration, we want to have a big bipartisan agreement. >> do you have the specifics? >> look at what ronald reagan and tip o'neill did. we raise about $1.20 trillion through income taxes. we forgo about $1.10 trillion in loopholes and deductions. deny those loopholes and deductions to higher income tax payers. so we can lower tax rates across the board. >> i hope i am going to get time to respond. >> we want to work with congress on how best to achieve this. >> no specifics. >> lower tax rate 20%. start with
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)